Life, The Universe, And Gaming: New IP Is The Ultimate Tease

To begin this week’s exercise in gaming subterfuge, I’m going to do something that will break hearts. I’m going to make a statement that I can barely bring myself to make, purely for the sake of getting a point across and I hate myself right now for having to do so…

I will explain my madness in a bit. I promise. For now let’s talk about new IP. For those who don’t know what IP stands for, it means intellectual property. IP doesn’t relate specifically to gaming, however it has become an accepted way of identifying a series of games, even if it’s a once-off, from developers that make multiple series of games. Or not. The point is that when a new series pops up, we call it a new IP.

Recent examples of new IP include Dragon’s Dogma, a very admirable attempt at an open-world RPG from Capcom; Dishonored, the latest creation from Arkane Studios who are still trying to show the world that they know how to do first person role-playing action; and Spec Ops: The Line, which I haven’t played but I’ve been told has one of the greatest stories ever to be found in a game.

When we play new IP, and it’s a good experience, our minds are opened up to entirely new worlds and our imaginations run free with possibility, especially when we’re promised more to come, in a series. The once-offs obviously fall away here, but as an example, what would you expect of a Dishonored sequel, to those of you who’ve played the game? What about, let’s say, a sequel to the excellent Alan Wake? A proper one, not some Arcade game. It’s a fascinating thought, isn’t it? Exciting, picturing what could be in some upcoming game.

Word on the street is that the next Rocksteady Batman game will be a prequel of sorts, and fans have gone wild with anticipation. Anyone who watched the E3 presentations earlier this year would have been exposed, for the first time, to Watch Dogs, which absolutely blew our minds and opened up the debate on whether or not the next generation of consoles would arrive next year to commemorate its launch. We saw BEYOND: Lost Souls and The Last Of Us, which showed nothing particularly new but because they were inherently new IP and from developers we’ve enjoyed games from, fans were excited.

But it seems to me as if new IP is just a tease. An extremely effective tease, mind you, but a tease nonetheless. Like that female who led you on for many years, stealing a kiss and telling you she has feelings for you, goading you into believing there might be something there for you but for all your efforts to please her, nothing ever happened because she only ever wanted to be a tease, and derived pleasure in doing so… What? Inevitably, especially when we allow our imaginations to run wild, new IP will lead us to disappointment in the future. Now this isn’t always the case, sure, but there seems to be compelling evidence that sometimes we need to stop being so easily teased.

In the last year or so, we’ve seen threequel after threequel as the season of new IP that began in early 2007 and ended in mid 2008, reached conclusion. We saw games such as Mass Effect 3, Uncharted 3, Resistance 3, Max Payne 3, Diablo 3 and most recently, Assassin’s Creed III. That’s not all of them, but it’s the relevant ones for this column. If you see where I’m going with this, well played.

In a Zero Punctuation review a while ago, Yahtzee compared gaming threequels to a night of sex (I mean, what else does he compare things to?) where he explained that the first time it’s a little awkward and reserved and it’s over before either of you know it, with the second time being when you’re both in your prime and able to really go at it, whereas the third time you’re both tired, sticky and just want to get it over with so you can fall asleep already. That is both an excellent and very visceral way of putting it. No pun intended.

It seems to me that none of the threequels that released in the past year or so really achieved the heights they were aiming for. You could argue Uncharted 3’s case, maybe, but I remember much complaint even from that. Now again, I know there was also Gears of War 3, Battlefield 3 and soon there will be Far Cry 3, but the former two also received a fair amount of criticism upon release. Their only real staying power was their multiplayer offerings and you all know it to be true. Search your feelings.

Why is this? Why didn’t a single threequel reach the staggeringly blinding heights it aimed for? My opinion is that we just let our imaginations run free when presented with new worlds and new ideas in the first games for these series and in the lead-up to these threequels, we simply expected too much and rightly so, our hopes were dashed. I speak in general, not specifically of myself.

On that note, I think it’s time I picked a bone with a very specific review that released last week. Remember, while the views expressed in this column are my own, I do respect the opinions of other writers on the site. But fuck if I still can’t figure out why Assassin’s Creed III is such a disappointment to some. I’ve heard person after person tell me that they are loving the game, granted a few of those did express dismay at the glitches and the ending, but that’s it. In all, most of the people I’ve spoken to agreed that Assassin’s Creed III is a great game. I’m inclined to agree with them. I’ve played over thirty hours of the game now, and I’m in sequence 9, I’ve collected pretty much everything and all that remains of me are naval and story missions, and I’m done. 100% Sync. And I’m loving every minute.

The story itself is intriguing and speaks of a different sort of character in the headstrong, angry Connor (and related persons) as opposed to Ezio (the man-whore) and Altair (the cunt), and I simply adore reading Animus entries and discovering the lore in the game, as well as conversations with Shaun Hastings, that stallion of a man. The gameplay feels smooth, refined and reactive and I often find myself in awe of what is presented to me, regardless of the fact that a random person just popped into view 10m ahead of me, that happened in previous games as well. The multiplayer now has a cooperative Wolfpack mode which is an absolute blast, with friends. The naval missions… I cannot emphasise enough how fun and addictive these are — and they’re some of the most beautiful missions you will ever find in a game, even the ones on foot — I’d even go so far as to wager Ubisoft could do an expansion with just this aspect of the game and I would buy it along with millions of others. I don’t care for some conclusion to the story of a character I’m indifferent towards, but I do care about being around during the time of the Freemasons, the Sons of Liberty and the dawn of a new era once more, which might be less relevant to us as South Africans but is still interesting as fuck to someone such as myself who loves history and world-altering events.

But no, because it didn’t provide enough answers, because it dilly-dallied about and didn’t get to the point and because it was in development for three years, it should have delivered more. Should have presented more. Should have answered more. Why? Pray tell. Why must the game sate our every desire?

I’ll tell you why, gamers. It’s because you allowed your imagination to run wild and free, and now Ubisoft have to take the wrap for that. Grow up, maybe?

The same could be said of a certain other game that released earlier this year. Do I even have to say its name, or do you all know by now that I’m referring to Mass Effect 3, a game which had me near tears in some parts because it was that emotionally engaging, had me laughing in other parts because it could do that as well, and was so packed full of gaming goodness that it is now — according to Raptr — my most played game on Xbox 360, thanks to that beautiful multiplayer mode which is continuously supported and updated. But no, let’s hate it because we didn’t like the original ending, it didn’t live up to what we expected of a game and didn’t provide enough closure for all our efforts.

Tell me, when did games stop being games? When did it all become such serious business, where we can spend some twenty to forty hours on a game and then utterly despise it? Imagine if games were about fun? If your immediate response is that we pay a lot for it, how does that change the argument of whether a game should be treated as a game or not? Games were always expensive. This isn’t something new. If anything, they’re cheaper now. More affordable because they didn’t go up in price along with inflation, but I digress on the Economics lesson. We were okay with shitty old games because what, we had no other choice? Well now we have choices and still, we bicker and moan about our experiences. I’m not saying don’t call out a bad game for being bad, nor am I championing bad games, but I’m saying that (not speaking of any particular review here, but of gaming in general) when you find a game underwhelming, fucking deal with it. Don’t go off telling the world about it, as if you’re some great saviour. What are you, gaming’s most righteous individual who must defend all gamers from the sins of publishers?

You allowed yourself to be teased, to be led on with false expectations and hope and those were dashed when you finally got what you thought you were owed, except it wasn’t at all what you wanted or expected. Like getting lucky with a really hot female until you discover she has a surprise under that skirt. You were led astray not because the publisher did so, but because you allowed yourself to be led astray. As Obi-Wan once said, “You have done that yourself!”

Now you might argue the case of BioWare where indeed the developers did make certain promises about the endings, that’s all well and good, but I’m going to ask this regarding Assassin’s Creed III, which some are calling the biggest disappointment this year: What did Ubisoft promise you? What did they tell you to expect that was such a great lie, that led you to such an extreme and negative viewpoint? Because I’ve been paying attention to the news, being in the media and all that, you know, and I don’t remember them making any wayward statements or promises. So what is it, then?

I personally think Assassin’s Creed III is one of the better games I’ve played this year, and I’ve played more than enough of it now to know that, regardless of how the ending might affect that experience. Perhaps I enjoyed the game because I was in no particular rush to finish it (and why would you be, it’s an Assassin’s Creed game, the stories were always just half the fun) or perhaps I just gave it a chance. I don’t know. What I do know is that I wouldn’t have had this much to say if not for the extremely polar and confusing statements I’ve seen, regarding the game. And now I don’t even have to mention those other threequels. To draw some relevance to arguing for the sake of argument, and for what it’s worth, I really hate Halo, but I keep that to myself except when asked about it. You know, because I know that there are others who enjoy it (those misguided simpletons — I jest), and who am I to tell them differently?

This is where I bring everything back in that storytelling arc of genius which was apparently non-existent in Assassin’s Creed III (Ubisoft if you’re hiring, email me) by explaining everything, including my original statement for this column. When we first played Assassin’s Creed, we were told that it would be a trilogy, that it would contain a story which we later discovered was centered not around our Crusades-based cunt character but Desmond Miles, a character from the then-future year of 2012. We were never told that it would culminate in some epic conclusion, we just assumed it would. Assassin’s Creed III seems a disappointment because it didn’t give gamers what they want, not because it was itself a bad game. Glitches? Like the other games. Not many refinements? You’re blind. Too much like the other games? What the fuck kind of criticism…

This is why I sometimes think Valve are geniuses, or perhaps they know that they’ve put themselves in a very dark, dank corner with no way out, so they attempt other games to draw our attention away from the great prize we all clamour for. We have hopes, dreams, our imaginations are running rampant and we all want to see what Gordon Freeman does next. And it’s for this reason, for the sake of preserving this tease of a perfect image in which gamers are to blame, not developers, that I hope we never see Half-Life 3. (I feel dead inside…)

Fuck me i thought IP meant Internet Provider lol and yeah i love AC3 as well and couldn;t understand the hate for it and the hate reminded me of the Mass Effect 3 saga we had during this year. But once again i suppose everyone is going to have their own opinion with regard to that and as for Half Life 3 inb4 it turning into an epic fail like Diablo 3 in 2014 :P

Michael Matusowsky

IP and ISP are two different things man. Internet Service Provider = ISP. You know what IP stands for now.

CataclysmicDawn

Internet Protocol :P

Trebzz

I can now give my approval to you to marry that hot girl on this site :P

http://www.facebook.com/KingCarloIII Carlo Serafino

I’m not even sure why you guys are arguing this xD

sage of the six paths

One word Carlo: COMPETITION!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

http://twitter.com/greatwyt Oethman Khan

is it that one with the mustache?

CataclysmicDawn

Someone’s been poking around on Facebook…

Puns… Fuck yeah!

http://www.facebook.com/nadine.franzsen Nadine Franzsen

lol

CataclysmicDawn

So long and thanks for all the fish…

“I’m not saying don’t call out a bad game for being bad, nor am I championing bad games, but I’m saying that (not speaking of any particular review here, but of gaming in general) when you find a game underwhelming, fucking deal with it.” – Now, I disagree with that. You can’t tell people not to have an opinion, and you can’t tell them not to express it. Freedom of speech includes things that you may find petty or irrelevant.

I’ll reserve my opinion on ACIII for when I play it, but I have never previously played a glitch Assassin’s Creed game, I’ve never had a freeze or a hang, or anything more than the odd animation glitched-corpse.

Though, I must say, while I disagree with a few of the points raised, they are valid, I just don’t agree with not allowing people to express their views. In interviews, did Ubisoft not hype ACIII? Did Bioware not advertise ME3 to make it sound excellent?

http://egamer.co.za/author/cavie Caveshen “CaViE” Rajman

Shall I tell you the extent of my glitch-experience with Assassin’s Creed III? The odd person now and again fading into view (read: popping into existence) in front of me, some clothing clipping through a character’s legs and a horse that was stuck in mid-air once. That’s it. No freezing, no hanging, no game-breaking glitching, nothing of the Skyrim sort.

And to your points about an opinion, I’m not discouraging opinions entirely, I’m just saying sometimes it’s nice to not have a town crier professing the guilt of some person whom the rest of the world doesn’t particularly have reason to hate, just for the sake of (purporting to be) watching out for their well-being. If I could bribe them IRL like I can in ACIII… I’m not speaking specifically of reviews here, mind you, I’m speaking of the people who would go and post on Facebook, Twitter, respond to and comment on everybody else’s stuff telling them how bad the game is when they were never asked. It’s a little tiring, to be honest.

You like a game, and you’re a fanboy. But it’s okay to hate a game, without being called a hater? To call it a disappointment, without being called entitled or expectant. You disagree on merits, yes, and I will grant you everyone is entitled to an opinion. That doesn’t make it right, nor does that make it worth sharing. If your opinion is that children are unnecessary and we should abandon them in the wild so natural selection may take its course, that’s your right as an individual. But why tout it to the world if you’re not trying to convert others? Why share it with those who never asked? And then call those who would challenge those opinions warped in the head, because OBVIOUSLY they’re wrong and you’re not. Do you see where I’m going with this?

CataclysmicDawn

Once again, I haven’t played ACIII, and I’ll reserve my opinion for when I do.

Isn’t that the point of a comments section though? If you don’t want anyone expressing their opinions on the review, game or article, shouldn’t you just remove the comments functionality. I understand in practice, you probably wouldn’t go to that extent, but not every comment can be “Hey! Nicely written” or “Have my babies!” (Although I’d imagine that’s the dream).

A fanboy doesn’t acknowledge a game’s faults, a hater doesn’t acknowledge a game’s strong suits, as far as I see it. And yes, I understand that not all opinions are worth sharing, but you can’t tell people to stop, as all it does is piss them off, it doesn’t stop anything. And I doubt they see it that way; they probably see it as getting their two cents worth in and having their say. If they’re stuck in their viewpoint, that’s their problem. I would love to see somewhere where everyone was acceptive of each other’s viewpoints, but I suppose we both know that’s not going to happen.

Michael Matusowsky

In assassin’s creed two there was this bug near the end of the game. Not entirely game breaking but it wasted time. It was on the mission where you had to kill those twelve dudes who were pro-comtrol of the people. Anyway the one sub-mission was on a boat and you had to kill the dude without getting spotted. Pretty hard considering there were guards literally all over the place on the boat. Had to use a smoke bomb just to not be seen even after I killed all the guards who stood at the sides of the ship. Anyway the glitch here was that it would double desync if you died/got spotted.. So basically it would first desync you and place you where you started the mission and then as it fully synced with would desync you straight away. Talk about irritation when it’s like your fiftieth attempt at that mission.

CataclysmicDawn

Never saw that one. Again, never got any glitches in the earlier AC’s

http://egamer.co.za/author/cavie Caveshen “CaViE” Rajman

Again, not saying don’t share, but I’m saying in the wrong context why would you want to share, if not to be some sort of gaming savant or know-it-all? In a review of the game, or a discussion of the game, fine. But elsewhere, why? And what of those dedicated “AC3 sucks and here’s why” articles that have been popping up on the internet? Why are THEY there? I don’t remember seeing a “Dishonored is awesome and here’s why” last I checked. Reviews, sure. I tried something similar with my column on Borderlands 2 because I felt there was enough done well that other developers could take lessons, but the hate-icles I’ve seen so far for AC3 don’t offer anything of the sort of CC, they’re just reasons why the game was allegedly a fail. Comments are worse. People on my Facebook and Twitter, read my Raptr auto-posts and then respond to them with negativity. Why? That sort of thing is what I’m gunning.

CataclysmicDawn

Because people _HAVE TO_ have their say. Why do you think people interrupt each other when they speak? And people tend to feel more strongly over things they believe are bad than things they believe are good.

Okay, I will admit, I have replied to a couple those posts, but I do it as a jest, not maliciously. Though to be honest, putting any form of content relating to games in a publicly accessible area such as Twitter or Facebook is just asking to be commented upon.

Michael Matusowsky

Completely disagree with you on that Mass Effect 3 ending stuff. I didn’t even know what the fuck was going on in all three endings besides: FRIENDSHIP, KILL ALL REAPERS, LOL IM A ROBOT!

They fucked up big time with the endings. Like 0 effort. The DLC with the extended endings is what the developers should have had in the first place to explain what the fuck is going on in each ending because I honestly didn’t get much out of the original endings. Also that Leviathan DLC should have been IN the game. God I hate it when developers sell DLC with CANONICAL elements of a story..

http://egamer.co.za/author/cavie Caveshen “CaViE” Rajman

I think the Leviathan DLC and the ‘Extended Ending’ DLC were originally meant to be the first true DLC pack, and then they chopped and changed when the fan uproar happened. It’s pretty evident from the contents of both.

wolftrap01

I agree with Cavie, he makes a valid point and shames that type of gamer that raging about everything.

I admit I was/am one of them too :-( now Cavie has exposed my shame, I’m sorry dude I wont do it again :'(I think you should relaunch this article when Mass Effect 4 comes out, because you Bioware are going to change things and most Mass Effects fan are going to bitch and moan that it wasn’t like the first 3

http://www.facebook.com/KingCarloIII Carlo Serafino

Still want to play Dishonored and see how new IP’s are going =)

http://egamer.co.za/ Azhar Amien

As for games just being about fun, to most gamers probably yeah. But like movies, gaming is now a massive industry where Triple A development has costs that go in the millions, and critics are of tremendous importance to a games success. By critics I mean those from the top international sites. It’s a gigantic industry, and I think we’re far past the “oh games are just for fun” stage. You know that when Darksiders II needs two million in sales just for the studio to break even, forget profit. You know that when “gamer” is hardly a term anymore. It’s like movies as well. To the average movie-watcher, they just watch for fun, but film critics have a serious part to play.

Critics don’t become critics because they dislike or don’t enjoy the subject matter. I’m pretty sure everyone who writes about games/movies and such has a distinct passion for it, and wants to voice that passion. Writing is using your voice.

In a generally well written column, I found this part of your column to be extremely irksome to me:

“But no, because it didn’t provide enough answers, because it dilly-dallied about and didn’t get to the point and because it was in development for three years, it should have delivered more. Should have presented more. Should have answered more. Why? Pray tell. Why must the game sate our every desire?I’ll tell you why, gamers. It’s because you allowed your imagination to run wild and free, and now Ubisoft have to take the wrap for that. Grow up, maybe?”

I have to ask, did you actually read AG’s review? Or any of the real complaints given to the game? I thought AG wrote a great review that clearly wasn’t just trying to bash the game because he could (he’s been a glowing fan of AC since the beginning). I mention this because you’re clearly referencing it. You’ve definitely tried, whether intentional or not, to make those complaining about the game out to sound quite foolish, or more importantly baseless in their complaints, and in doing so missed or neglected most of the important reasons for their complaints.

And then you blame the gamers for getting too excited about the IP and having high expectations for it? Why are they criminal for loving the potato out of ACII and singing its praises until the sun went down, but then being disappointed that ACIII didn’t deliver something as good? You need to realise that complaints, whether constructive or not, have a base, just like praise. The two can co-exist. Constructive crit is 100% important. Articles critting AC3 are of 100% importance, provided the author of them has reasonable and justifiable complaints. People are free to sing praise, just like people are free to spew complaints. Every big triple A game has, on its official forum, a dedicated thread created by staff: “Post fan feedback here, whether positive or negative.”

I know, I spent three hours reading the Assassin’s Creed III one after finishing the game, and a further hour or two reading the technical section to see if It was only myself getting issues. I read comments of people who made far more insightful criticisms and praises of the game than I did at times. All of that will help Ubisoft in the future of this franchise.

On that note. How do you think Ubisoft created the outstanding Assassin’s Creed II? Do you think they thought gamers were whiny and self-entitled and disregarded what they said? Or thought they should grow up? Maybe, but that’s clearly not what their actions showed. It’s pretty obvious they spent hours reading reviews, both positive and negative, their own official forums and ALL reactions to the game in order to go out and correct every single fault gamers and critics had with the first game, plus deliver more of what was considered good. Complaining is good, if it has a base, but obviously you need to siphon out the meaningless or tacky complaints versus the legitimate ones.

I bought Assassin’s Creed III. I spent R500 on it, and spent many hours of my life on it. I’m 100% entitled to speak out if I’m disappointed in it, and that should be encouraged, because nothing gets better without feedback, whether good or bad, and because exchanging opinions is productive. As Bracken said, not every comment should be “awesome game” or “i loved it” or “I hated it” or “it suxzors”.

The Assassin’s Creed III hati-cles, as you call them, have just as much right to be there as the Assassin’s Creed III praise-icles. And yes, negativity poses more strongly, but it all comes down to passion for the subject matter, and do we not have the end of the year awards on every media outlet where people sing the praises of the year’s best games until everyone runs out of positive adjectives? It’s as useful to do that as it is to talk about where games failed.

I think you should focus more on praising Assassin’s Creed III, if you disagree with those who are unhappy with it, rather than denouncing and trodding on those who found it to be disappointing. I mean, for a little example when AG loved inFamous 2 and Resistance 3 and I thought they were seriously underwhelming, we managed to co-exist quite peacefully despite still holding those same disagreements today, and we learned a lot from our hours of discussion about both games.

Bracken said it right. On the internet, everyone has a voice. From forums, to social networks to wherever. It’s the place anyone can share their opinion where they can’t in real life. I mean, aside from gaming events like 2upGamers or rAge, where will you find a more convenient, easy to access circle of people who all share your interest in games, other than the internet? There is always a channel for them to share it. Our own comment section is an invitation. When you make statuses on Facebook, you are asking people to comment, whether positive or negative. And many of these gamers actually go to the official forums and get involved in active discussions about the game. You’re only going to piss people off by telling them to shove their opinion if it’s negative.

As for Mass Effect 3, it’s about context. Why do you think the world isn’t lit aflame by ACIII’s ending? Because Mass Effect was the players’ story to create and influence, over three games. Plus you can throw in a bunch of personal issues with developers breaking promises and lying and all that. AC is not. I agree though, as I will totally shake my head at anyone who says Mass Effect 3 is a shit game BECAUSE of its ending alone. But I take no issue with the reactions to the ending. I thought the game was great, but the ending left a damn sour taste and I still believe today that it was piss poor writing riddled with blatant plot holes and nut shots. And that entire saga is something I want to forget. But as Jim Sterling said, it indicates passion, and many people who complained, including myself, were people who loved the series.

I feel like I haven’t said everything, because there are a lot of talking points in the column and comments section, but hey, my thoughts.

sage of the six paths

I just had a great idea while reading this post. Azhar and Cavie should do an “Epic Rap Battle of History” in the next podcast. :D

http://www.facebook.com/people/Sahil-Lala/577012665 Sahil Lala

“But no, let’s hate it because we didn’t like the original ending, it didn’t live up to what we expected of a game and didn’t provide enough closure for all our efforts. Tell me, when did games stop being games? When did it all become such serious business, where we can spend some twenty to forty hours on a game and then utterly despise it?”^^^ Coz people are MORONS. And gaming is going mainstream. And whenever something reaches the mainstream public, it gets corrupted, defiled, filthied and sullied. I remember the good old days of gaming when people bought something, took it home and played it without ranting on the internet about how awesome it is or how much it sucked.There wasn’t any b*tching, whining or moaning and you got what you got and enjoyed it or not~These days people are becoming so entitled to stuff it’s sickening. And it’s not only the gaming world that’s suffering, it’s lots of other things as well.

http://egamer.co.za/ Azhar Amien

I don’t think that’s entirely true, Sahil. There wasn’t ever a time where people played their games and kept quiet about it, and didn’t do those things. It’s just a hundred times more prevalent now that games have grown to the gigantic potato-sized ball of awesome that it is today.

The word “gamer” doesn’t exist anymore, because practically everyone plays games. The difference between now and then is that it’s a billion times easier to find a forum/circle/group of people who play games than it was years ago.

http://www.facebook.com/nadine.franzsen Nadine Franzsen

Oh my TL:dr well not all the way to the end. New IP’s are always great I’m guessing you’re article ended with something along the lines; the new IP’s are soon-to-be series that we will despise and we’ll want more new IP’s. Its a vicious cycle. Gamers will never be satisfied with anything.